Station Buildings

[142094]

Must be before my time! Never seen in like that, seems silly to have put shops above it.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Must be before my time! Never seen in like that, seems silly to have put shops above it.

Oh so it was shops, was it? Wonderful. Dunno whats worse, being underground or having Trams (Godawful things!) runing through it?

 

[PinzaC55]

Aha, I've found a picture! Here's a link to Sunderland station the way I remember it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pinzac55/3553977976/in/photostream/
There was actually a lot more light than I thought...A few other good pictures around Sunderland in that photoset, including a picture of my local station, Seaburn, when it was a real station and not just a chavvy corrugated Metro shack...

Glad you like my photos! I've watched the gradual decline of my home town and it's station as a spectator since I left in 1983. The latest episode was when then they announced a "big revamp" a couple of years ago with a "spectacular lightshow" on the disused northbound platform and "art" on the southbound. The "lightshow" turned out to be glass bricks with some bulbs behind and the "art" is some posters in standard glazed frames. The cost? £7,000,000. But hey it looked good in the Echo.

 

[142094]

Oh so it was shops, was it? Wonderful. Dunno whats worse, being underground or having Trams (Godawful things!) runing through it?

Metros are not trams, they don't run on roads. Metro is light rail.

 

[sprinterguy]

Glad you like my photos! I've watched the gradual decline of my home town and it's station as a spectator since I left in 1983. The latest episode was when then they announced a "big revamp" a couple of years ago with a "spectacular lightshow" on the disused northbound platform and "art" on the southbound. The "lightshow" turned out to be glass bricks with some bulbs behind and the "art" is some posters in standard glazed frames. The cost? £7,000,000. But hey it looked good in the Echo.

Yeah there's some really good photos there, really brings back all my old memories. And welcome to the forum by the way!

For general info: The station was built over in 2001 when construction work for the Metro extension was underway, in order to allow for expanded retail space at street level above the station. I think that Nexus also wanted a fully underground station so that the Metro was more in keeping with the Newcastle city centre underground Metro stations. I remember that the old canopies and platform were looking pretty run down by that point, so some sort of refurb was going to have to take place. I recall it was a LOT more pleasant standing on the platform with the sunlight trickling in, with the gentle tick-tick-ticking of the big red clock in the background, than it is now that Sunderland has been reduced to a big dark cavern.

I'll admit that I'm not overly impressed with the latest station refurbishment. The one thing it has done is made the station a lot lighter, which is a definite plus, but the lighting seems extremely stark and clinical. But I don't think it deserves all the hype that it's been given in the local press, etc, and for the limited change there has actually been to the station, the amount of money that has been spent seems astronomical. I seem to recall that the refurb has often been referredo as a "transformation": I wouldn't quite go that far! And have they actually installed any public toilets now? Last time I was on the station I was just passing through, so didn't really get a chance to look around. It's always seemed crazy that a station serving a city of the size of Sunderland doesn't even have any toilets! I think that would be the first area to be addressed, and I don't think it has been...

 

[PinzaC55]

Thanks for the welcome! I used the station a couple of weeks ago and I noticed that already water was seeping in through the roof, leaching the concrete and dripping onto the platform, which had bollards on it to stop people slipping.
I knew the late John Boyes who designed the signalling for the station and I quizzed him why they hadn't restored the station to it's original layout, i.e two island platforms but with one for heavy rail and one for the Metro. The answer was basically "cheapness".

 

[sprinterguy]

Thanks for the welcome! I used the station a couple of weeks ago and I noticed that already water was seeping in through the roof, leaching the concrete and dripping onto the platform, which had bollards on it to stop people slipping.
I knew the late John Boyes who designed the signalling for the station and I quizzed him why they hadn't restored the station to it's original layout, i.e two island platforms but with one for heavy rail and one for the Metro. The answer was basically "cheapness".

I did hope at the time that the plan was to have seperate platforms for heavy rail and the Metro in Sunderland, with the Metro using the currently disused island, I was disappointed when they just bricked up that side of the station. I'm sure it would have helped create a bit of extra capacity at the station, although I suppose it would be limited as any heavy rail train from Sunderland would still get stuck behind Metros all the way to Pelaw as at present.

 

[PinzaC55]

I did hope at the time that the plan was to have seperate platforms for heavy rail and the Metro in Sunderland, with the Metro using the currently disused island, I was disappointed when they just bricked up that side of the station. I'm sure it would have helped create a bit of extra capacity at the station, although I suppose it would be limited as any heavy rail train from Sunderland would still get stuck behind Metros all the way to Pelaw as at present.

When the Metro was being planned they produced a series of brochures showing the intended layout at each station and I still have them - I'll have a look and see what it showed at Sunderland.At Millfield they were actually going to build the new station basically the same as the 1890 station with two long ramps behind the old Millfield cinema.
In fact, if they'd rebuilt Sunderland "as was" it would have been a huge advantage as the GCT trains would have been able to stand in the "heavy rail" platforms without blocking the whole of the Metro platforms as at present.
There were of course four tracks between Monkwearmouth and Wearmouth until 1984 and they could have reinstated these to give extra capacity if they hadn't built the Stadium Of Light station as a 2 platform station.

 

[142094]

It will be interesting in the future if extra trains are planned to run along the Durham Coast line (especially when the resignalling finishes) with regards to the amount of room in Sunderland for through trains, the Metro and GC.

 

[PinzaC55]

I don't think the idea of the Durham Coast Resignalling is to allow more trains, more like to speed trains up by creating more block sections in the spaces left by abolition of the former mechanical boxes at Horden and so on. It'll be a shame to see the lovely lattice bracket signal at Seaham go - it's replacement is already in position in front of it 8-(
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
BTW more on Sunderland - I have an original brochure produced by BR at the time Sunderland station was rebuilt (1966) and I may get round to copying it and posting it on Flickr.It's fairly hilarious in that boasts how much ASBESTOS is in the street level building, they were quite proud of it! It includes some neat aerial views of the station in various stages of demolition and rebuilding.

 

[142094]

I thought that the resignalling was to allow more freight trains to use the route? Apart from Dawdon, what other boxes are going to be closed? Seconded about the Seaham signal, seems a shame they couldn't put another semaphore in or restore the original.

 

[PinzaC55]

As far as I am aware all of the signalboxes between Ryhope Grange and Bowesfield inclusive will go as far as block posts are concerned.I would guess it was possible that maybe Hall Dene might be retained to supervise the crossing. Sending more freight this way would be all very well but as other posters have pointed out the line north of Sunderland is saturated with Metro traffic so it's hard to imagine how the two types of train will coexist.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Metros are not trams, they don't run on roads. Metro is light rail.

Either way I dispise them

 

[142094]

Sending more freight this way would be all very well but as other posters have pointed out the line north of Sunderland is saturated with Metro traffic so it's hard to imagine how the two types of train will coexist.

What I heard a few years back was that more freight was due to come from Tyne Dock along the Durham Coast line instead of going via the ECML. I agree that with the Metros this would mean it being quite congested, although could be easily done I reckon. There are about 5 Metros per hour south and the same number going back north, then 1 Northern per hour each way and the occasional Grand Central. So there is quite a few gaps where a freight could go through (although admittedly it would have to slowly follow a Metro in some cases). Plus it could also use the loop just before East Boldon if it needed to get out of the way.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Either way I dispise them

That's because you don't have any in Lancashire!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

What I heard a few years back was that more freight was due to come from Tyne Dock along the Durham Coast line instead of going via the ECML. I agree that with the Metros this would mean it being quite congested, although could be easily done I reckon. There are about 5 Metros per hour south and the same number going back north, then 1 Northern per hour each way and the occasional Grand Central. So there is quite a few gaps where a freight could go through (although admittedly it would have to slowly follow a Metro in some cases). Plus it could also use the loop just before East Boldon if it needed to get out of the way.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That's because you don't have any in Lancashire!

Bury's in Lancashire, they have trams! No, I agree with them in cities, but hate when they take over heavy rail (ie. Bury, Altrincham, Tyne & Wear etc, croydon)

 

[PinzaC55]

What I heard a few years back was that more freight was due to come from Tyne Dock along the Durham Coast line instead of going via the ECML. I agree that with the Metros this would mean it being quite congested, although could be easily done I reckon. There are about 5 Metros per hour south and the same number going back north, then 1 Northern per hour each way and the occasional Grand Central. So there is quite a few gaps where a freight could go through (although admittedly it would have to slowly follow a Metro in some cases). Plus it could also use the loop just before East Boldon if it needed to get out of the way.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That's because you don't have any in Lancashire!

I've also heard that NR wish to reopen the East-South curve at Boldon Colliery to take Tyne Dock traffic south.The problem with all this is that Metro trains have vastly superior acceleration to freight trains and stop at every station.So you have the equivalent of a Hare shackled to a Turtle! Mix in the congested nature of Sunderland station with Metro, Northern Rail, GCT and freight trains then mix in the occasional breakdown and you have a situation which is ideal for train spotters but otherwise is just...nuts. It brings to mind Fraser from Dad's Army shouting "We're doomed!!"

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Reopen the island at Sunderland: use one for Metro, and one for NR/freight. Cut Metro service to 4tph, and give Northern money/come to some agreement to get them to run 2tph for the stations. This may free up a couple of miuntes. I wish. Sometimes I wonder why trams don't take over the world.

 

[ainsworth74]

and give Northern money/come to some agreement to get them to run 2tph for the stations

Where are Northern going to get the extra units to run this extra service?

 

[142094]

Bury's in Lancashire, they have trams! No, I agree with them in cities, but hate when they take over heavy rail (ie. Bury, Altrincham, Tyne & Wear etc, croydon)

I agree, I don't like seeing trams taking over heavy rail. But I don't see Metros as trams so no problem there.

I've also heard that NR wish to reopen the East-South curve at Boldon Colliery to take Tyne Dock traffic south.

That's right, it is in the Route Utilisation Strategy, although it is taking some time. One person could probably do the whole job in a week!

Reopen the island at Sunderland: use one for Metro, and one for NR/freight. cut Metro service to 4tph, and give Northern money/come to some agreement to get them to run 2tph for the stations. This may free up a couple of miuntes. I wish. Sometimes I wonder why trams dont take over the world

Having two island platforms would be sensible, but you'd still have the problem of the northern tunnel being only wide enough for two tracks. Still could mean more through tracks which could be used to get Metros or whatever out of the way. But it'll never happen, would require too much investment. Plus Nexus will not want to cut the Metro frequency even more, makes them look silly spending all the money on the extension in the first place. Not even sure if Northern could stop at the Metro stations even if they wanted to (platforms may have been altered).

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Where are Northern going to get the extra units to run this extra service?

Come on mate, this is an ideal world I wrote that in.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree, I don't like seeing trams taking over heavy rail. But I don't see Metros as trams so no problem there.



Having two island platforms would be sensible, but you'd still have the problem of the northern tunnel being only wide enough for two tracks. Still could mean more through tracks which could be used to get Metros or whatever out of the way. But it'll never happen, would require too much investment. Plus Nexus will not want to cut the Metro frequency even more, makes them look silly spending all the money on the extension in the first place. Not even sure if Northern could stop at the Metro stations even if they wanted to (platforms may have been altered).

I hate all light rail outside of cities (like I mentioned!)

Your second long paragraph is exactly why I hate them!

 

[ainsworth74]

Come on mate, this is an ideal world I wrote that in.

Sorry

I had my serious hat on rather than my ideal world hat

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Sorry

I had my serious hat on rather than my ideal world hat

It's alright, I find it hard to find out when people are being serious or not when posting

 

[142094]

Yep, light rail should only be for urban areas, if hope to God that the Penistone line and York - Harrogate never get turned over for trams. Also if there is a reopening to Washington, it should be heavy rail with a connection to the Metro at Washington and not Metro between Pelaw and Washington.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Metrolink want Manc to Atherton to Wigan and Manc to Rochdale via Castleton to be light rail.

 

[sprinterguy]

Where are Northern going to get the extra units to run this extra service?

They used to be there, when Sunderland-Newcastle had 4tph before the Metro was introduced to Sunderland. Given the current rolling stock shortage, it's probably just as well the Metro extension occured to allow units to be sent elsewhere, or else the situation would be much worse. And is a further reason why Nexus thinking is very often Metro orientated: Improving the frequency or capacity of the heavy rail services cannot be done, as there isn't the rolling stock available, and even Northern place a low priority on the north east in terms of rolling stock provision!

Principally, as 142094 says, Nexus do not want to look stupid by withdrawing further Metro services after all the investment made in the extension, despite the fact that the current frequency is getting very close to the former heavy rail one, only with longer journey times, les room for improvement and fewer passenger provisions (e.g. toilets for a journey of half an hour!). It's not so much trams taking over heavy rail routes that is the problem up in Sunderland, it's more that tram (type things) are sharing heavy rail routes and stifling any possible improvements.

Reinstating the Boldon east curve would still be a capacity enhancement, as currently the GBRf coal trains that operate via the Durham coast have to take up a lot more of the shared Metro/heavy rail section capacity: By having to run from Brockley Whins to Pelaw northbound to run the loco round, then having to run the entire length of the shared section southbound, still inbetween the Metro services. Reopening the curve would really reduce the amount of time the freight services running down the Durham coast spend crammed between Metros, especially given that the Brockley Whins to Pelaw section is especially busy with other freight services that run via the ECML from Tyne Dock. And there is the East Boldon loop available to keep southbound freights out of the way if needed as a second contingency.

 

[yorksrob]

Metrolink want Manc to Atherton to Wigan and Manc to Rochdale via Castleton to be light rail. god save us.

They must be barmy. They're not exactly the type of self-contained routes that can be hived off easily - unless they want us to sit in a tram all the way from Leeds

 

[Invincibles]

Might be devils advocate but the Wigan route does actually make some sense, especially if some of the towns that lost their heavy rail connection could be linked in somehow. Also it would solve a lot of problems through Salford Crescent assuming the metrolink would be grade seperated from the heavy rail

Of course that is only the case if Chat Moss is electrified and set up as the natural alternative to Bolton and Chorley as a way of getting to Preston and the North West.

I am not then sure where Wigan and Bolton services fit in to the scheme, Metrolink over that route would be possible I suppose and maybe then into Bolton town centre. Would free up a bit of capacity on the line up from Salford Crescent.

Back on topic I quite like the new Manchester Piccadilly, Leicester has a good entrance but the rest of it is pretty poor and I do not know if you can call Blackpool South ugly because there is so little of it (I will though)

 

[PinzaC55]

The idea of using the disused island platform for Metro trains would have been possible before they rebuilt the station and extended the shops over the disused platform.It would also have had the benefit of moving the Metro/NR junction to the north end of the station.BTW when they built the shops over the open cutting south of the station they left sufficient space between the concrete supports for the station to be restored to it's original configuration.
But to restore it now would be more or less impossible or at least need the expenditure of epic amounts of money.I suspect the money originally spent on turning the station into an underground car park (2 million I think) plus the 7 million just spent would have paid for a very nice overall roof.

 

[Clip]

Sorry

I had my serious hat on rather than my ideal world hat

Im sure the Ideal world shopping channel could sell you a hat

 

[142094]

But to restore it now would be more or less impossible or at least need the expenditure of epic amounts of money.I suspect the money originally spent on turning the station into an underground car park (2 million I think) plus the 7 million just spent would have paid for a very nice overall roof.

Quite a shame, would look much better with a decent roof. Was looking at pictures of Stockton station on Pinzac55's flickr and it had a magnificent roof. Bugger all there now. Pure vandalism.